Lowercasey uppercase, or how to extend a unicase typeface

Comments

(The proportions need working out, though, I had to
narrow down /c/e to make the serifs work, which rendered /h/n way too
wide, or the other way round).

This addresses what Andreas said about /c /e being too helvetica, but goes against K’s I wouldn't change anything else, it's very attractive: I’m not sure whether something innocent and pretty in its naïveté wasn’t lost. But maybe not!

I switched to a bolder weight as the leading master though, and different weights draw attention to different features.

The new /h/n/ are better, but perhaps a bit too asymmetric now? They stood out to me at first sight. Your arches are much wider than those in my Quinoa Bold, so you need less asymmetry than I did to compensate for the stem. I also reduce the asymmetry in the lighter weights.

Or maybe it's just that the arch still reaches down too far on the right stem...? Or maybe the /n/ is just a bit too wide.

The top of new /a/ looks a bit «stumpy»... maybe try tapering it from the inside, or giving it a slanted cut at the top?

I agree that the new /t/ looks strange. Maybe have the stroke come from below and end upwards, like a tilde?

New /c/ is much better. New /s/ might profit from another serif on the bottom (you might get away with even smaller serifs if space gets tight), or perhaps have the serifs on the outsides of the stroke...?

EDIT: The stumpy descenders of /p/ and /j/ now start to stand out. I'd try giving them a slanted cut and perhaps a serif (as in /q/, or to the bottom left).

I played a bit with all of it, and I’m still not sure I have to let go. Obviously the new serifed / open aperture letters look more polished, but the old ones, after an overhaul, are not all that hideous and seem to go well with the new /a.

Is there a chance for an alternate cut?

As for /s, maybe the problem is in the spine, not lack of lower serif. But I'll try that later too, maybe.